View Single Post
  #131   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2005, 12:22
Billfred's Avatar
Billfred Billfred is offline
...and you can't! teach! that!
FRC #5402 (Iron Kings); no team (AndyMark)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: The Land of the Kokomese, IN
Posts: 8,491
Billfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond reputeBillfred has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Lessons learned 2005: The negative

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Jones
Maybe next year FIRST can do away with the refs altogether. It could be done with pressure pads, contact switches, and tip sensors. The onboard computers could calculate how hard and where they’d been hit and signal the master computer to disable the right bot.

Heck, while we’re at it, let’s do away with the drivers, HPs, and coaches. Run the full two minutes in autonomous mode; put bar codes on the game pieces and scanners on the goals.

That way there’d be no need for moan and groan posts. Not one person cheated. No one to disparage.
I know that's hyperbole, but I also think there's a bit of a good idea in there.

Suppose next year's game were designed such that the only penalties/disablements/DQs given out were for ramming, tipping, unsafe operation, and the obligatory humans touching the robot. Penalties don't always be the answer--there is always creating the game's scoring options such that a strategy based on interference (such as blocking both opposing ball chutes in FIRST Frenzy, a ten-point penalty) aren't necessarily illegal, but either fall under the heading of "not GP" or "just plain stupid" instead.

I know what you're thinking now: "But Billfred, what about the human players?! We've got to protect them!" Once again, a game design to that effect can solve that. Using the example of balls, suppose the ball chutes were more along the lines of 2000 (a picture of which can be seen here), modified such that humans can't reach out onto the field. An example to that effect is attached to this post. edit: now it actually is attached. (If you're still worried, put a requirement that any ball-delivering devices can't be designed to interface with the chute. Then they have to build it that way, lest they don't compete.)

Put simply, the whole reason I see that we have penalties is to make a certain event (such as hitting your opponent while in the loading zone) undesirable. There is, however, more than one way to skin a cat; making certain events impossible or stupid to do through other aspects of game design does the same thing.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	chuteexample.PNG
Views:	88
Size:	8.4 KB
ID:	3357  
__________________
William "Billfred" Leverette - Gamecock/Jessica Boucher victim/Marketing & Sales Specialist at AndyMark

2004-2006: FRC 1293 (D5 Robotics) - Student, Mentor, Coach
2007-2009: FRC 1618 (Capital Robotics) - Mentor, Coach
2009-2013: FRC 2815 (Los Pollos Locos) - Mentor, Coach - Palmetto '09, Peachtree '11, Palmetto '11, Palmetto '12
2010: FRC 1398 (Keenan Robo-Raiders) - Mentor - Palmetto '10
2014-2016: FRC 4901 (Garnet Squadron) - Co-Founder and Head Bot Coach - Orlando '14, SCRIW '16
2017-: FRC 5402 (Iron Kings) - Mentor

93 events (more than will fit in a ChiefDelphi signature), 13 seasons, over 60,000 miles, and still on a mission from Bob.

Rule #1: Do not die. Rule #2: Be respectful. Rule #3: Be safe. Rule #4: Follow the handbook.

Last edited by Billfred : 28-04-2005 at 13:47. Reason: darnit, forgot the attachment.